mute your microphone. public participation, sf gov tv is broadcasting that live. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available by calling 1-415-655-0001. and then entering access code 2491 067 6903. when we reach the item you're interested in speaking to, please press star 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear why your line has been unmuted that is your opportunity to speak. you'll hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. i will take the next person to speak. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly

and slowly and please mute the volume on your television or computer. if i could take roll. commission president koppel? >> president koppel: here. >> vice president moore: here. >> commissioner chan: here. >> commissioner diamond: here. >> commissioner fung: here. >> commissioner imperial: here. >> commissioner tanner: here. >> jonas: thank you, commissioners. first on the agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance, item 1, 2021-008984, conditional use authorization, proposed for continuance to january 27, 2022, item 2, case number 20217919, 2000 post street, conditional use authorization proposed for continuance to february 10. item 3, 2019, 22283, a home sf

project authorization is proposed for continuance. further on your regular calendar, and discretionary review, we received last minute request for continuance for item 8, 2021-698, cua, van ness avenue. a conditional use authorization to april 28, 2022. and under your discretionary review calendar, item 10, 460 vallejo street. it's proposed for continuance to march 31, 2022. we should open up public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on any of the items

proposed to be continued by pressing star 3. again, we're only taking comment on the matter of continuance. through the chair, you have two minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. land use coalition. i am calling regarding the continuance of 460 vallejo. and, you know, i'm actually opposed to it because the public has been kept in the dark in terms of what we are accomplishing by continuing a case that involves violations and illegal activities on the part of the developer. so i really appreciate it if the commission could share with us, the public, as to reasons for continuing this case. normally when things get continued, it's a matter of developer wanting to further negotiate with neighbors to reach a settlement. in this case, there are no neighbors to settle any kind of negotiations with, because this

is open-and-shut case of violations. and illegal merger. and typically illegal merger goes to cancel use authorization, so i think the public does deserve some explanation as to why this case is being continued. very unusual. usually these cases are conditional use authorization and in this case this was never a conditional use authorization if it wasn't for a d.r. being filed by neighborhood organizations, it would never have reached this far. so, i really appreciate it if the commission could share with the public the reasons for continuance and what we're trying to accomplish by delaying this case for another three months. thank you. >> jonas: thank you. the information i have related to the continuance for vallejo street is it does not come from

the project sponsor. it is not to work out anything with the neighbors, but the department of building inspection has made new discoveries on the site, including more violations that need to be sorted out before the matter can be resolved. that is the reason it's being continued or requesting a continuance for a couple of months here. >> hello, this is anastasia. i'm the coordinator of the land use and planning watch committee of san francisco tenants union. i'm also -- thank you for the explanation, jonas, regarding the case of 460 vallejo street. this involves tenants who were brought out of their -- bought out of their units and now they have to make a mega mansion out

of the sites. it's just -- it just needs to be delved into. so, yeah, i look forward to this hearing. thank you. >> jonas: go ahead, sir. >> can you hear me? so this is justin, project sponsor representing the property owner. while we would much prefer to have the matter heard today, we're not opposing the continuance. there are no new building violations per the meeting we had with the inspector yesterday. the continuance was prompted by a last-minute complaint filed with d.b.i. two days ago alleging the unit merger at the property. this is an issue that has been

investigated at length by the city. the inspector came to the property yesterday and reviewed the two units and various plan sets and found no merger. we're okay with the continuance as we want to continue to be cooperative and transparent with this process as we have for two years already. we want to make sure planning and d.b.i. has no questions with the project. we only ask that the new hearing be scheduled as soon as possible. thank you. >> go ahead, caller. caller, would you like to submit your public comment?

>> ye -- [indiscernible] elderly. 40,000 each year in san francisco bay area. oversee the programs we operate at the -- [indiscernible] -- which we rent for park and rec for over 10 years. our staff and seniors came to the workshop on the -- [indiscernible] -- >> jonas: i'm sorry, i'm going to interrupt. it's very difficult to hear your comments in the very beginning. the portsmouth square matter is going to come up later on the agenda, right now we're only taking comment on matters proposed to be continued. so you'll need to press star 3 again when we call up that matter under the regular calendar.

last call for items proposed to be continued? you need to press star 3. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public, commissioners, your continuance calendar is now before you. >> president koppel: commissioner imperial. >> commissioner imperial: thank you for the explanation yesterday. move to continue all items as proposed. >> second. >> jonas: thank you, commissioners, on the motion to continue as proposed, commission tanner? >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner chan: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> commissioner moore: aye. >> president koppel: aye. >> so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 7-0 and will place us under commission matters for item 4, commission comments and questions.

seeing no requests to speak from the members of the commission, i will note to you all that the election of officers is scheduled to be held at your next hearing, january 20. at that hearing you can nominate new officers or continue that matter to a later date. >> commissioner moore: i had one question. i kind of didn't press my button in time. i heard about ab854. again, there are many, many things discussed in sacramento and this particular item deals with evictions. i'm wondering if staff has any insight into what is trying to be accomplished by this particular legislation? ab854. i would appreciate it if somebody could give us an insight once you have it. thank you. >> jonas: if there is nothing

further, we can move on to department matters and item 5, director's announcements. >> good afternoon. commissioner moore, we'll look into that and get back to you on it. two items. i wanted to highlight an item in your packet. earlier in december, we had an informational presentation on the climate action plan and the community safety element. the climate action plan was released in december of 2021 by the department of environment and we're updating the community safety development as part of our general planned updates. but during that hearing you asked several questions and asked for clarification on certain items, so we've included a memo in your packet that responds to those questions and provides additional resources and links in following up to some of the questions. just fyi, we hope to be back to

the commission in may 2022 to introduce those related general plan amendments. then we're before you in two weeks also with an informational item on the housing element and i wanted to give a callout to those on our staff led by the community equity team, but also the environmental planning team who have been working diligently to prep for that hearing. you'll get a packet of information by the end of this week in preparation of that hearing in two weeks. and that's all i have. >> jonas: there are no questions. thank you for that, director hillis. we can move on to item 6, past events at the board of supervisors and board of appeals, historic preservation did not meet yesterday. >> good afternoon, commissioners. filling in for aaron star who is out sick today. the board heard two items of interest. the first was the landmark

designation of 2778 24th street. the historic preservation initiated this landmark designation on january 20, 2021 and recommended approval on october 6, 2021. the building is significant for its association with the development of san francisco's latino business community during the 20th century. a multi-generational family owned and operated company, it was founded by the sanchezs in 1924 with a popular place that provided mexican food. the company is the longest operating ta mali operating business in san francisco. development of the larger latino business community, particularly that of the mission district in the 20th century. landmark designation is

sponsorered by supervisor ronen and at committee, supervisor melgar, peskin and preston signed on as co-sponsorers. also at land use committee was the ordinance that allows bars with cu authorization. the commission heard this item on december 16, 2021 and voted unanimously to approve it. there was little discussion on the item before the committee sent it to the board. this item has first read at the full board this week where it passed unanimously. the only item of interest was the appeal of the cu approval for the project at 13th street. this was continued to february 8, 2022, to allow the appellants to work with the sponsor on desired checks. that concludes -- changes. that concludes my report. thank you, jonas. >> jonas: thank you, audrey. the board of appeals did meet

yesterday and had one item that may be of interest to the commission. the board considered an appeal of the variants denial for the project that proposed to subdivide the existing lot. and then develop the new vacant lot with a two-unit building, resulting in nearly full lot coverage of the existing lot. the conditional use authorization was considered by the commission in 2020 and then again in 2021 where the planning commission voted to deny the conditional use authorization. issued a variance decision letter denying the proposed lot area and rear yard variances. determining the proposal did not meet any of the five required findings for variants. at the appeal hearing, the project sponsor focused on housing policy issues and other lot split variances of the past

20 years, however, the board agreed with the zoning administrator they must focus on the subject lot and the specific proposal are not the appropriate mechanism to apply new policies for the city. as such, the board focused on the five findings and the board found that the project did not meet those findings and voted unanimously to uphold the denial of the proposed variance. commissioners, if there are no questions, then we can move on to general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission for two minutes and when the number of speakers exceed the 15-minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda.

again, you need to press star 3 and when you hear that your line is unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is georgia shutis. i sent an updated list with an additional project that should have been reviewed as tantamount to demolition, with a total of 40 speculative projects flipped in noe valley in the last few years. i neglected to include the one that i added which originally sold in 2013. was reviewed and approved in 2014 without a d.r. work started on 2015 and then flipped in 2017. i sent photos that showed the work on this project in july and october of 2015 and reminded me of a conversation between the former zoning administrator and a former commissioner that took place on june 25, 2015 as part of general public comment.

which starts at 35 minutes on the sf gov tv. please watch the entire general comment for that day. my comment is about the e-mail i sent in the day before that june 24, 2015 and i showed some photos that are still ongoing about extreme alterations that should be classified as demolitions. including something that is more prevalent in the past six years and that is the increase in major excavations. this june 2015 general public comment is prior to both the r.a.t. and the peskin legislation attempts to deal with section 317 as well as the changes to the clarifications in the c.i.d. on the video, sanchez says it's hard to enforce projects in the photo if not caught at the right time and section 317 has problems. he agreed they're cause for concern. that makes me think about a horse running out of the barn

because a door was left open. the problem is the demo calcs have never been adjusted since 2008. when the commission approved the first c.i.d., the calcs would need adjusting and the staff would return with recommendations to adjust them and, of course, that never happened. thank you very much. have a great afternoon. take care. >> good afternoon, my name is amy zoe i'm a planner at ccdc. we request the commission certify the environmental mrakt report on the portsmouth -- >> jonas: i'm sorry to interrupt you, but we're taking general public comment right now. portsmouth square, the eir certification will come up under the regular calendar. in fact, i think it's scheduled to come up next, so you have to

press star 3 one more time when we call that item. members of the public, last call for general public comment, for items that are not on today's agenda. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public, general public comment is closed and we can now move on to your regular calendar for item 7, case 2018-135 # 7, env. portsmouth square improvement project. the public hearing on the draft eir is closed. the public comment period for the draft ended september 20, 2021. public comment will be received, however, comments submitted today may not be included in the final eir. meagan, the floor is yours. >> good afternoon, president koppel and members of the commission. can i have the ability to share my screen? thank you.

planning department staff and environmental coordinator 0 for the portsmouth square improvement project members of the project sponsor team from the san francisco recreation and parks department are also present. the item before you today is a certification of the final environmental impact report for final eir for the proposed project as adequate, accurate and objective. and as having been prepared in accordance with the california environmental quality act, or ceqa, and san francisco's local procedures for implementing ceqa. i'll provide a brief overview of the project, the conclusions of

the eir and the environmental review process. the site compromises portsmouth square at 733 kearney street. the pedestrian bridge that connects the two properties on the edges of the chinatown and financial districts. portsmouth square is approximately 66,000 square foot two-level public park under the jurisdiction of the san francisco recreation and parks department. portsmouth square was the city's earliest public scare and is associated with historical events. beneath the park is the portsmouth square garage, a four-level parking garage that was constructed in 1961. kearny street is a 27-story, 298 foot tall building. the second and third floors of the hotel building were developed as the chinese culture

center which opened in 1973 and is connected to the portsmouth square by the pedestrian bridge spanning kearny street. the pedestrian bridge is a 28-foot wide, 210-foot tall concrete pedestrian bridge over kearny street and connects to the second floor of 750 kearny street. the bridge provides access via a central staircase to the cultural center on the third floor of the building. the san francisco recreation and parks department proposes to renovate the existing with a new children's playground, exercise equipment, signage, sidewalk, landscaping, terraces and a new clubhouse. the proposed project would demolish and remove the pedestrian bridge spanning

kearny street that connects portsmouth square to 750 kearny street. it would seismically upgrade and rewaterproof the roof. it would replace curb cuts and portions of the streets adjacent to portsmouth square for utility connections. the final eir concluded that the project would result in historical impact. specifically, 750 kearny street and the pedestrian bridge. the final eir identified the three mitigate measures to reduce impact. development of an, staff limitation of the historical and implementation of a salvage plan. while these mitigation measures would reduce the project's impact on historic resource, the impacts on 750 kearny street and the pedestrian bridge would

remain significant and unavoidable. additionally, the final eir concluded that impacts to historic architectural resources, cultural resources, travel cultural resources and noise would be significant, but could be mitigated to a less than significant level. all other impacts from the proposed project were found to be less than significant or would result in no impact. the final eir analyzed three project alternatives, including the no-project alternative, which would mean no changes to the project site and thus no impacts. under the full preservation alternative, the pedestrian bridge would be retained by renovating the park. as a result, the new clubhouse would be smaller, about 4,000 square feet in size, compared to 8,300 under the proposed project. the alternative would not result in significant impact to

historic resources. and only the historic resource mitigate measure regarding the plaques and monuments would be required. all other mitigation measures would still apply to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. the partial preservation alternative would be similar to the proposed project except that following removal of the pedestrian bridge, a new overlook platform would be built in the location of the existing bridge within the park. the overlook would function as an architectural reference to the bridge. it would result in adverse impact to the pedestrian bridge and 750 kearny street and like the proposed project would result in significant impacts. the same historic resource mitigation measures would apply to the alternatives and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. all other mitigation measures

would provide impact to less than significant levels. they incorporated public comment on the environmental analysis throughout the environmental review process for the portsmouth square project. this slide presents key dates in the process. on september 23, 2020, the planning department issued a in the of preparation of a draft eir for the project. public comment on the scope of the eir was taken from september 23, 2020 through october 23, 2020. comments received were addressed in a draft eir and initial study which were published concurrently on august 4, 2021. the historic preservation commission reviewed and commented on the proposed project alternatives on june 16, 2021, and the draft eir on august 18, 2021. the h.p.c. found the draft eir was adequate and accurate.

were made available in english and chinese around the project sites. during the draft eir public comment period, the public hearing during the draft at the planning commission -- sorry the public hearing on the draft eir was held on september 9, 2021, and the public comment period for the draft eir concluded on september 20, 2021. the department received comments in writing and at the september 2020 hearing. the comments were in support of the development. comments on the potential, physical environmental impacts of the proposed project were responded to in the response to comments document involving text changes to the draft. on december 29, 201, the planning department published and distributed responses to comments received.

and the draft eir. the planning department prepared the final eir for the portsmouth square improvement project with chapter 31 of the san francisco administrative code and planning department policies. the final eir is adequate and provides decision-makers and the public with the information required pursuant to ceqa to understand the potential environmental impacts of the project, alternatives and mitigation measures. on this basis, planning staff request the commission adopt the motion before you. the motion does not approve the project, but certifies that the eir is adequate, accurate and objective. this concludes the presentation on the eir certification. and i will be available for questions if you have think. thank you. >> jonas: thank you, meagan. if there are no immediate

questions from staff, we should open up public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on the eir. by pressing star 3, you'll each have two minutes when you hear your line has been unmuted, that's your indication you should begin speaking. >> good afternoon, president koppel and commissioners. my name is alan lowe and i'm speaking on behalf of the committee for better parks and recreation in chinatown. cbprc supports the portsmouth square project and urges the commission to certify the environmental impact report. commissioners, this is the final lap to a long and tort truss process regarding the portsmouth square project. this planning started almost 11 years ago. thank you, commissioner chan, for your advocacy back in the

day and securing funding to jump start the project. this project is the result of over $2 million in consultant fees. there are two community needs studies. over 100 stakeholders meetings and many, many community workshops to design and program the project. just for the eir, it's taken over two years to complete, mainly to analyze the removal of the private kearny street bridge. the eir is comprehensive in studying the removal of the private bridge. this is an in-depth analysis of the proposed project. it reviews alternatives and all comments are addressed and there are no objections of the finding of the eir. the measures are significant to address any impacts on the removal of the bridge. the eir meets the requirements of ceqa. this removal of the kearny street bridge is an intricate

part of the project and will create a new expanded center. we strongly urge the commission to certify the eir so the community can build a vision for the portsmouth square improvement project. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is emily. i'm the director of social services with -- of the elderly. we serve over 40,000 seniors each year in san francisco bay area. and i oversee the programs we operate at the portsmouth square clubhouse which we have rented from the park and rec for more than 10 years ago. our staff and seniors attended every workshop on portsmouth square. our community came together and worked hard on the design that

eliminated the bridge and was a huge barrier to allowing us to use the clubhouse for much needed programs. we're excited about the new square with the increased space as well as much larger and more functional clubhouse. portsmouth square is probably one of the most important icons and landmarks for chinatown. and many important community events are held in the portsmouth square. during the pandemic, it was used as a community and vaccination sites with distribution sites, community events and outdoor events that many of our community groups answered, like anti-asian hate rallies. improved community center to all the residents.

so, please approve and certify the eir so we can proceed. and the sooner the bridge comes down, and the rebuilding of the park starts, it would transform the kearny street corridor and the entire community would be able to enjoy the benefits of the new portsmouth square would bring. thank you. >> i'm a senior community organizer from chinatown. i'm speaking on behalf of the chinatown sro collaborative. we consist of over a thousand members, they're all chinatown residents. we hope to improve their the living conditions and moving the s.r.o. units. as you know, the units are very, very small. you can never imagine how a family of four sleep, eat in that small room. not to mention families share

bathroom and kitchen with other tenants. obviously, they have no space to exercise, so where do they go? portsmouth square. it's a very crucial space for our family. for many of you it may just be a usual park, for us, it's more than that, it's part of our home and it's truly our living room. our families hang out there, exercise there. and we grow up with portsmouth square. this place actually witnessed many important moments of chinatown. it's part of our daily life. this improvement project is very important for us and meaningful for us. our family -- advocacy in design process. we think the eir is comprehensive and adequate. in order to let our family and more and more generations to continue to enjoy this park, please certify the eir. thank you so much and thank you, supervisor peskin, for your

support. thank you so much. >> good afternoon, again, commissioners and president koppel. i'm a plan are at ccdc. we strongly request that the commission certify the environmental impact report in the portsmouth square project. you see that the air quality today is poor. think about how this impacts some of the residents, many who are elderly and live in these small units and very cramped living conditions without a family room or living room or outdoor space. these residents rely on portsmouth square and feel the park is their living room and the opportunity to be outdoors and it's one of the the many reasons why a resiliency center, something that is proposed to be part of the improvement project is needed. there has been over eight years of community engagement, capital needs assessment, planning and design and in addition to

expensive outreach including five public workshops done. so we'd like to thank supervisor peskin's office, staff at the rec and parks and staff at planning for their work in moving this forward. we have a strong request that the commission certify the report. you can refer to the letter by malcolm young, the director of the board for more details. thank you for your time. >> jonas: thank you. last call for public comment on this item. you need to press star 3. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public, public comment on this matter is closed. and it is now before you, commissioners.

>> commissioner moore: i want to thank the community and everybody who spoke on behalf of the eir for the comments. i couldn't agree more that mr. alan lowe summarized what is so right about this particular eir and what is in front of us. i'm in full support of approval. looking forward to what the other commissioners have to say. >> commissioner fung: i find that the eir is full and complete and i'm prepared to move to adopt it. >> commissioner moore: second. >> president koppel: commissioner imperial. >> commissioner imperial: thank you and thank you commission for making the motion. i just wanted to make comment that this eir, that all of the alterations, the work proposed,

that this project is the most adequate. it meets all the community input for the implement of the park and preservation of the pedestrian bridge. and also just want to add as one of the public comment mentioned, that this park has been vital and improving it ultimately enhances the viability and the vitality of the town that uses it. i've been around portsmouth square and i see how the community actually utilizes it, as an extension of their living room. thank you to the planning department and the community that worked together on this. i'm prepared to vote.

>> jonas: okay, seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the commission, there is a motion that has been seconded to certify the report. >> commissioner tanner: very enthusiastic aye. >> commissioner chan: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> commissioner moore: very enthusiastic aye. >> president koppel: aye. >> jonas: so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 7-0 and will place us on -- item 8 has been continued. on item 9, case number 2021-313cua, 4221 geary boulevard. this is a conditional use authorization.

>> good afternoon. the proposal before you is a conditional use authorization to establish a cannabis retail use within the geary boulevard neighborhood commercial zoning district. geary boulevard serves as a major transit route. the geary boulevard offers a wide variety of goods and services, such as institutional uses, eating and drinking establishments, auto-related uses and other retail stores to a population greater than the immediate neighborhood. the surrounding zoning is primarily rm-1. nearby uses include the sfpd richmond station located half a block to the south and kaiser permanente campus to the east. each store is greater than 1,100

feet from the project site. the subject property is developed with a non-historic mixed use building containing one commercial space on the ground floor and one residential unit on the second floor. no tenants will be displaced as a result of this project. the subject site was formerly a restaurant and is currently vacant. it proposes improvement and store front changes with no expansion of the building envelope. proposed business hours are daily from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. onsite cannabis consumption is not proposed and not permitted per the draft motion. as noted in the executive summary, the sponsor conducted outreach under the office of cannabis good neighbor policy which includes providing a mailed notice to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the site and conducting

online outreach meetings on april 31 and august 2, 2021. staff received one public comment in opposition to the project based on proximity to a preschool at 4228 geary boulevard. after the commission packets were distributed, a total of 15 e-mailed comments in support of the project were received, including nine addressed to the planning commission that were forwarded to the commission secretary. supporters cited the ideal location because of access to public transit and proximity to a police station. staff recommends approval of the conditional use authorization. the project meets all applicable requirements of the planning code. the proposed use will complement the mix of goods and services currently available in the district and contribute to the economic vitality of the neighborhood by occupying a store front that would otherwise

be vacant. this concludes my presentation. i will be available to answer questions. the project sponsor team is here and would like to address the commission. thank you. >> mr. hansen, are you with us? >> yes, i am, can you hear me? >> jonas: we can. and you have five minutes. >> okay, great. so good afternoon, everyone, my name is burt hansen, i'm the c.e.o. in the proposed dispensary at 4221 geary. i live on 8th avenue for over 13 years and i'm friends with the residents and business owners in the neighborhood. my business partner grew up in the neighborhood as well. and went to washington high school. he was previously the operations manager at a dispensary across town. i plan on being in the neighborhood as long as i can and want the neighborhood to be

safe and vibrant as it can be. i'll be the liaison for the project. i've already reached out to join. we're around the corner of the police station. the kaiser offices and pharmacies and doctors offices. potential to fill a space that has been vacant and neighborhood eyesore. there was briefly a beer bar in that spot, but the spot was vacant for 12, 13 years. from a security perspective, the police station is ideal and any concerns about crime or vandalism. we'll have security on site at all times. the small size of the store means there won't be cannabis stored on the premises. so that no one is --

[indiscernible] -- sell to minors, brought up by the one e-mail against. we'll also be a purveyor of medical cannabis afforded to those across the street at kaiser. some who traveled for will appreciate the convenience of the location. finally, cannabis dispensary will be -- to a long dead store front. too many businesses have been shuttered in the last few years. residents of the neighborhood will appreciate the revitalization of a block that suffered from multiple store closures since 2008. that kind of hard to imagine a stronger operational team. i want to finish by saying this project is perfect for the location. the residents will appreciate a cleaner and safer block on geary

boulevard. thank you very much. >> submitted. >> jonas: that concludes the project sponsor presentation. we should open up public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission by pressing star 3. seeing no request to speak from the public, public comment is closed and this matter is now before you. >> president koppel: while i'm waiting for other commissioners, let me express my support for staff recommendation. commissioner diamond. >> commissioner diamond: move to approve. >> second.

>> jonas: okay. seeing no further deliberation, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions. on that motion, commissioner tanner? >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner chan: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> commissioner moore: aye. >> president koppel: aye. >> jonas: so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 7-0. and concludes your lengthy agenda today. >> it was a long one. >> yeah. >> jonas: commissioners, your calendar is very light. as i mentioned to some people, if it continues this way, we'll only be hearing d.r.s when we reoccupy city hall. enjoy the rest of your afternoon. >> president koppel: ajournaled. -- adjourned.

>> van ness avenue runs from market street to bay street in san francisco. south vanness runs from south of market to cesar chavez street. originally residential after the 1906 earthquake it was used as a fire break. many car dealerships and businesses exist on vanness today with expansion of bus lanes.

originally marlet street was named after james vanness, seventh mayor of san francisco from 1855 to 1856. vanness heavy are streets in santa cruz, los angeles and fresno in his honor. in 1915 streetcars started the opening of the expo. in 1950s it was removed and replaced by a tree-lined median. it was part of the central freeway from bayshore to hayes valley. it is part of uses 101. it was damaged during the 1989 earthquake. in 1992 the elevator part of the roadway was removed. it was developed into a surface boulevard. today the vanness bus rapid transit project is to have designated bus lanes service

from mission. it will display the history of the city. van ness avenue..

>> my name is angela wilson and i'm an owner of the market i worked at a butcher for about 10 years and became a butcher you i was a restaurant cook started in sxos and went to uc; isn't that so and opened a cafe we have produce from small farms without small butcher shops hard for small farms to survive we have a been a butcher shop since 1901 in the heights floor and the case are about from 1955 and it is only been a butcher shot not a lot of businesses if san francisco that have only been

one thing. >> i'm all for vegetarians if you eat meat eat meat for quality and if we care of we're in a losing battle we need to support butcher shops eat less we sell the chickens with the head and feet open somebody has to make money when you pay $25 for a chicken i guarantee if you go to save way half of the chicken goes in the enlarge but we started affordable housing depends on it occurred to us this is a male field people said good job even for a girl the interesting thing it is a women's field in most of world just here in united states it is that pay a man's job i'm an encountered woman and raise a

son and teach i am who respect woman i consider all women's who work here to be impoverished and strong in san francisco labor is high our cost of good ideas we seal the best good ideas the profit margin that low but everything that is a laboring and that's a challenge in the town so many people chasing money and not i can guarantee everybody this is their passion. >> i'm the - i've been cooking mile whole life this is a really, really strong presence of women heading up kitchens in the bay area it is really why i moved out here i think that we are really strong in the destroy and really off the pages kind of thing i feel like women befrp helps us to get back up

i'm definitely the only female here i fell in love i love setting up and love knowing were any food comes from i do the lamb and that's how i got here today something special to have a female here a male dominated field so i think that it is very special to have women and especially like it is going at it you know i'm a tiny girl but makes me feel good for sure. >> the sad thing the building is sold i'm renegotiating my lease the neighborhood wants us

to be here with that said, this is a very difficult business it is a constant struggle to maintain freshness and deal with what we have to everyday it is a very high labor of business but something i'm proud of if you want to get a job at affordable housing done nasal you need a good attitude and the jobs on the bottom you take care of all the produce and the fish and computer ferry terminal and work your way up employing people with a passion for this and empowering them adjourned. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their

shop & dine in the 49 with within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 my name is jim woods i'm the founder of woods beer company and the proprietor of woods copy k open 2 henry adams what makes us unique is that we're reintegrated brooeg the beer and serving that cross the table people are sitting next to the xurpz drinking alongside we're having a lot of ingredient that get there's a lot to do the district of retail shop having that really close connection with the consumer allows us to do exciting things we decided to come to treasure island because we saw it as an amazing opportunity can't be

beat the views and real estate that great county starting to develop on treasure island like minded business owners with last week products and want to get on the ground floor a no-brainer for us when you you, you buying local goods made locally our supporting small business those are not created an, an sprinkle scale with all the machines and one person procreating them people are making them by hand as a result more interesting and can't get that of minor or anywhere else and san francisco a hot bed for local manufacturing in support that is what keeps your city vibrant we'll make a compelling place to live and visit i think that local business is the lifeblood of san francisco and a vibrant community

>> public comment will be available for each item on the agenda. members of the public who wish to make public comment, the phone number to use is 415-655-0001. the access code is 2494 795 0788. you need to press # # to speak. item 1,